When where to eat and where not to eat are the same place

I'm focusing on just two big stories today.

On the one hand, this week 7x7 Magazine rolled out its annual Big Eat. Edited by the inimitable Marcia Gagliardi of Tablehopper, it's a fairly comprehensive list of things you want to put in your mouth. I was able to map 99 of the 100 (blue pins) since one was a food truck without a consistent location. I've eaten more than a few things on the list, and if you've got the gumption to try them all, I hope you have a good gym. The final tally must be somewhere in the vicinity of one billion calories.

Unfortunately, another list of restaurants about a hundred strong made the news, as the city revealed that it was investigating restaurants that appear to be pocketing funds they acquired via surcharges to offset the Healthy San Francisco program. In other words, if any of these restaurants is in fact guilty of it, they have been tacking on a nominal amount to your bill, and rather than using it to provide affordable health care for their staff, simply keeping some or all of it. (Patxi's recently settled a case after having been implicated.) I'm not saying that all of these restaurants are guilty as charged. Perhaps the city is on a fishing expedition to drum up cash, and this seemed like low-hanging fruit. But I can say that your favorite restaurant, bar or even corner cafe may well be on this list; many of the city's most esteemed ones are. In fact, there's quite a bit of overlap between these two lists. Awkward...